A review of some of the arguments which are commonly advanced against parliamentary interference in behalf of the Negro slaves : with a statement of opinions which have been expressed on that subject by many of our most distinguished statesmen, including

PROPERTY OFTHE

A REVIEW

OF

SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS

1VHICH ARE COMMONLY ADVANCED

AGAINST PARLIAMENTARY INTERFERENCE

IN BEHALF OF

THE NEGRO SLAVES,

WITH

A STATEMENT OF

OPINIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED

ON THAT SUBJECT

BY MANY OF OUR MOST DISTINGUISHED STATESMEN,

EARL GREY,
EARL OF LIVERPOOL,
LORD GRENVILLE,
LORD DUDLEY AND

WARD,
LORD MELVILLE,
MR. BURKE,
MR. PITT,

INCLUDING,

MR. FOX,
MR. WINDHAM,
MR. WILBERFORCE,
MR. CANNING,
MR. BROUGHAM,
SIR S. ROMILLY,
MR. WARRE,
4-c Ac. Ac.

LONDON :

Printed by EUerton and Henderson,
Gough Square, Fleet Street ;

SOLD BY J. HATCHARD AND SON, PICCADILLY ;

AND J. & A. ARCH, CORNHILL.

1823.

A REVIEW,

4-c

J. HE subject of Colonial Slavery being about to be
brought before Parliament, it may not be unseasonable
to take a brief view of some of the arguments which
will probably be advanced against the proposed legis-
lative interference with that system. In replying to
those arguments, it is my intention to have recourse,
not so much to my own reasonings as to the recorded
opinions of some of our most distinguished statesmen,
who, during the last thirty-five years, have been led to
employ their powerful minds in considering the subject.

Throughout the whole progress of the controversy re-
specing Slavery and the Slave Trade, one main argument
of the Colonial party against public discussion has been
the danger of insurrection. From the year 1787,
to the present day, it has been their uniform policy (and
that policy has to a certain extent succeeded, especially
with the timid and the ignorant,) to excite alarm on this
point, whenever questions touching any part of their
system have been publicly agitated.

In the year 1788, a bill was brought into Parliament
by Sir William Dolben for regulating the African Slave-
Trade, and preventing those horrors of various kinds
which had hitherto accompanied the Middle Passage.

The bill was opposed by the united influence of the
Slave-traders of Great Britain and the Planters of
a2

4

the West Indies. The absolute ruin of that invaluable
branch of commerce, the Slave Trade, and the entire
loss of the immense capital embarked in the West
Indies, were confidently and clamorously predicted as
the certain result even of that measure of regulation.
The alarm of insurrection was at the same time sounded
throughout the land. And here it is curious, and not a
little edifying, to observe the identity of the very ex-
pressions which were then employed to stigmatize this
harmless and beneficent measure — as a measure of cruelty
and blood — as pregnant with devastation and massacre —
with those which now fill the mouths of the holders of
Slaves whenever they allude to the approaching discus-
sion on the subject of Slavery. A single instance may
suffice.

While Sir W. Dolben's bill was before the House of
Lords, on the 25th June 1788, the Duke of Chandos
produced a letter which had been addressed by a gentle-
man in Jamaica to Mr. Fuller, then agent for that island,
informing him, that, " in consequence of what was doing
in Parliament, the Negroes expected that an end was to
be put to their slavery ; that there was the greatest
reason to fear they would rise in consequence ; and that
the island was in a state of great alarm and ajjpre-
hension." The Duke added, that " he had many more
corresponding accounts with which be would not then
trouble the house ; but as often as the bill was agitated
he should think it his duty to warn their Lordships of
the danger that any agitation of such a subject was
liable to." (The Dnke, be it remembered, was speak-
ing of a proposal not to emancipate the Slaves, but to
regulate the Middle Passage), "The universal massacre,"
he went on to say, " of the Whites might be the conse-
quence. He must be permitted to know rather more
of the West-India Islands than most of their Lordships $

5

and it was his duty to lay the result of his acquaintance
with the customs of these islands before their Lordships.
The Negroes read the English newspapers as constantly
as the ships from England came in ; and, FROM WHAT
WAS THEN DOING, they would conclude their final
emancipation was at hand*."

By such assertions and arguments did the Colonists
of that day endeavour to prevent the Parliament of
England from taking a single step to abate the atroci-
ties, and lessen the wholesale murders, of the Middle
Passage, or to alleviate, in however small a degree, the
mass of misery which was crowded within the holds of
Slave-ships. It is unnecessary to say, that the appre-
hensions then expressed proved utterly vain, and that
not the slightest disturbance of any kind occurred in the
West Indies to justify them. But to say this, is to give
a very inadequate idea of the gross imposition on Par-
liament and the Public, which such a statement involved.
During the year 1788, and for several years both before
and after that period, the whole of our West-India
possessions continued in a state of the most profound
tranquillity. Not only did no insurrection occur, but
not the very slightest tendency to insurrection was
manifested, in anyone of our colonies ; a fact which
may be attested by persons who resided in the West
Indies during these years, and who never heard of a
single occurrence which was capable even of being
perverted to the purposes of alarm f. Then comes the
bold and confident statement of the noble Duke,
grounded on the assumption of his superior acquaintance

* Hansard's Parliamentary History, 1788-9, pp. 646, 647. t
t The insurrection in Grenada did not occur till March 1795 ; and
this was caused in no degree by parliamentary discussion, but by
the intrigues of Victor Hugues, operating on the French planters
and Slaves (who were very numerous) in that island.

6

with West-Indian habits and customs, that " the
Negroes read the English newspapers as constantly
as the ships from England came in." In making this
statement, the Duke was doubtless deceived ; but who-
ever might be its author, the profligate contempt of
truth which it necessarily involved, could only be paral-
leled by the grossness of that ignorance which could be
deluded by it. To every man who had resided in the
West Indies, it must have been known not only to be
false, but to be as absolutely absurd and preposterous as
it would be to hear a Jamaica legislator gravely affirming,
in the House of Assembly of that island, that the horses
in England read the Jamaica newspapers. I can
think of no parallel which will more aptly describe the
case. The Slaves in Jamaica were universally just as
ignorant of letters as the horses are in England.

Similar alarms of danger were sounded during every
succeeding stage of the abolition controversy, and with
as little foundation in truth as that just alluded to ;
and on this alleged ground of danger, not only the abo-
lition of the British Slave-Trade, but even that of the
Foreign Slave-Trade carried on in British ships, was
uniformly opposed, for many successive years, by the
West Indians.

In 1791, we find Mr. J. Stanley, a West-Indian,
agent, threatening the Parliament with the horrors of
insurrection for agitating the question of abolition *.

In 1792, Mr. Baillie, agent for Grenada, affirmed,
that the " West- India Islands were filed with emissaries
and inflammatory publications by the friends of the
abolition "j*."

In 1794, when Mr.WiLBERFORCE moved for leave to

* Hansard's Parliamentary History, vol. xxix. p. 315. ______

t lb. p. 1079. None of those emissaries were ever named, nor were
any of those publications ever produced.

7

bring in a bill to abolish the Slave Trade for the supply
of foreign colonies, it was opposed by the West Indians
generally #. Sir W. Young and others represented the
proposal as " dangerous in point of time and experi-
ment ;" and Mr. Jenkinson, now Lord Liverpool,
also thought such a bill "highly dangerous f."

In 1795, Mr. Wilberforce was again opposed on

* Only one West Indian, a Mr. Vaughan, was of a contrary opi-
nion. He thought it extraordinary, and extraordinary it doubtless
was," that any British colonists should be anxious to raise up rivals
to supplant themselves.'' The West-Indian body, however, turned a
deaf ear to this friendly remonstrance, and continued to oppose
the abolition of the Foreign as well as of the British Slave-Trade,
until they had verified Mr. Vaughan's prediction, and had seen
themselves actually supplanted by the rivals they had themselves
thus raised up. Even in 1806, Jamaica petitioned against the abo-
lition of the Foreign Slave-Trade ; and this, notwithstanding the
loud warning which had been addressed to the West Indians on this
subject by Mr. Stephen, in a work published in 1804, entitled The
Opportunity. It may not be without its use to quote in this place
a passage from Mr. Wilberforce's Letter to his Constituents in 1806,
to the same effect, viz. —

" What but party-spirit could cause them to support the conti-
nuance of that branch of the Slave Trade, which consisted in sup-
plying foreigners with Slaves ; and slill more, what else could pre-
vent their even strenuously and eagerly anticipating the efforts of
the Abolitionists for stopping the supply for the cultivation of the
immeasurable expanse of the South-American continent." " The pro-
prietor in our old islands will not deny that these continental settle-
ments have not only injured him by greatly increasing the quantity
of colonial produce iu the market ; but that enjoying very decided
advantages over our older islands, from a more fertile soil, from
being exempted from hurricanes, from the opportunity of feeding
their slaves more plentifully and at a cheaper rate ; they have been
to him the cause of great loss and embarrassment. Had this evil
been suffered to advance, the ruin which must have followed from
it, though gradual, would have been sure and complete/' — 1st Ed.
p. 284 — 3d Ed. p. 133.

t Hansard's Parliamentary History, vol. xxx. pp. 1446, 1447.

8

similar grounds, in an attempt to abolish the Foreign
Slave-Trade*.

In 1796, the renewal of the motion for the general
abolition was represented by Mr. Jenkinson and Mr.
Dent, as endangering the safety of the West-India
Islands ; and Mr. Barham affirmed, that if carried, it
would create universal rebellion in the islands -f.

In 1798, Sir W. Young desired the House to
reflect what calamities might happen if the motion was
carried £ ; and in 1799 he represented the mischiefs of
discussion as " obvious and fatal. The effect would be
to deluge the islands with blood §."

Again in L807, to pass over the intermediate discus-
sions, we find the enemies of the Abolition using the
same language. Lord Redesdale believed " it
would be the means of producing in the West Indies
all the horrors of insurrection ||." Mr. Brown, the
agent of Antigua, dwelt on " the alarming danger to the
lives of our fellow-subjects from the Abolition. He
viewed it with fearful anxiety as necessarily leading to
a fatal paroxysm of insurrection and revolutionary
horror. When the Negroes in the island shall learn
what has been done, it will be sufficient to animate them
to a spirit of discontent and a desire of redress, from
which a scene of misery and horror may be expected
equal to that which has disgraced France."

Nor were these alarming views of danger confined
to the warmth of parliamentary debate ; they formed a
prominent topic in all the petitions presented to the
Legislature on the subject, from the beginning to the end
of the controversy, by the West-Indian Assemblies and

* Hansard's Parliamentary History, vol. xxxi. p. 1330.

t Ibid. vol. xxxii. p. 740. J Ibid. vol. xxxiii. p. 1402

§ Ibid. vol. xxxiv. p. 528.] || Ibid. vol. viii. p. 701.

9

their agents. Even so late as the year 1807, the peti-
tions on this subject continued to speak the same lan-
guage. They all professed to view with *' peculiar
alarm" the very discussion of the subject, as neces'
sarily leading to scenes of horror and blood. And at
a still later period, in 1815, when Mr. Wilberforce
brought forward his bill for establishing a registry of
slaves in the West Indies, similar denunciations of
danger were renewed in still louder and more vehement
tones than had ever been heard before ; although it was
not very easy to perceive what connection existed
between a Registry Bill and insurrection. That they
had in reality no connection, excepting what was attri-
buted to them by the policy of some West Indians, and
the blind passion of others, is perfectly obvious from
what has since taken place. The different Colonial
Legislatures have since passed Registry Acts for them-
selves ; and Parliament, (with the vain view of giving
force and efficacy to these crude, imperfect, and incon-
sistent enactments,) has also passed a general law of the
same kind. And all this has been done without the
least agitation, or pretext of agitation among the slaves.
The subject excited no more interest or attention among
them than a turnpike bill would have done ; and but for
the indiscreet, and clamorous, and misplaced opposition
of the West Indians themselves, in 1810, the measure
would have passed then as quietly as it afterwards did
at a somewhat later period.

The best answer which can be given to those menaces
of insurrection, by which the proposal to abolish slavery
is now opposed, seems therefore to be, our past experi-
ence of the utter falsehood of similar alarms created for a
similar purpose. And upon that ground the matter might
be safely left to the good sense of the country. It may

10

not, however, be inexpedient to bring forward some
authorities on the subject to which it will be felt that no
inconsiderable weight is due.

The general feeling, indeed, of our eminent statesmen
was in strict unison with that of the Marquis Townsend,
who stated in 1788, that he would " not be influenced by
such reports, when he was doing a right thing as a legis-
lator,and that he could not be made to believe that the Ne-
groes would be induced to rise because Parliament was
intent on granting them relief *." Who,indeed, ever heard
of an attempt on the part of prisoners to break from con-
finement by force, and at the hazard of their lives, when
there was a fair hope of early and peaceful relief? Such
a proceeding on the part of the slaves would also be con-
trary to all experience and to all analogy. No instance
can be produced to justify the apprehension of it. But
innumerable instances may be brought forward of a
contrary kind ; instances, that is to say, which prove
that the fair hope of relief, by peaceable means, would
extinguish even the desire to rebel, in those who had
ground to expect such relief f.

But it may be further demonstrated, that the West
Indians, when they sounded, in former times,those alarms
of danger from public discussion which they are now
repeating, had really no faith in their own representa-
tions. Let us hear on this point the statement of Earl
Grey, in 1807.

"We are told," says his Lordship, "that the West
Indies will be put into a state of revolt if we agree to

* Hansard's Pari. Hist. 1788-9, p. 647.

t See on this subject a work which has just appeared from the pen
of the venerable champion of this cause, Mr. Clarkson, entiiled
Thoughts, &c.

11

the abolition ; — and the preamble of the Bill, which states
that the Slave Trade is contrary to justice and humanity,
is in this view particularly complained of. But is it ne-
cessary to tell the Negro, torn from his native land, his
wife, his children, his friends, that the act of violence
which tears him from all the former endearments of life,
is contrary to humanity ? If he cannot see it in the
wounds inflicted on the back of his fellow-sufferer; if he
cannot hear it in the cries of his fellow-slave, are we to
suppose that he will read it in the preamble of an act
of Parliament? But the West Indians themselves do
not believe the argument. If they did, never was the
conduct of men more imprudently regulated. After
twenty years, during which the question has been agitated,
is the House to be told, that all the debates, motions, re-
solutions, and reports which have gone forth, declaring
Slavery to be contrary to humanity, have had no effect
in producing that conviction, and that this preamble is to
produce it? Has not the Jamaica Gazette, on
various occasions, stated the very means by wlticli insur-
rection might he excited, and plans of revolt organised
and carried into effect ? And yet, is it not notorious
that there never were so few insurrections amongst the
Negroes," (indeed there had been none, if we except the
revolt caused by the French in Grenada,) " as in the last
twenty years, during which an abolition of this infamous
traffic has been under discussion ?*"

In 18L6, Mr. Brougham adopted the same line of
reasoning, and produced to the House three Jamaica
Gazettes, in which it was openly and vehemently as-
serted, that Registration was only a cloak for emancipa-
tion f.
Again, in 1818, Sir Samuel Romilly, who had

* Hansard's Debates, vol. viii, p. 951.
t Ibid. vol. xxxiv. p. 1213.

12

brought before the House some cases of cruelty which
had occurred in the West Indies, was led to remark ; —
" We are told that such discussions have no other
effect than to excite disorder and insubordination, and
to break the chain which bound the slave to his master,
This goes, however, to prevent all discussion. Are
we then, under such a pretence, to allow slaves to un-
dergo the most rigorous treatment without inquiry \
It was the custom to attribute every insurrection among
the Slaves to those who took an active interest in their
condition. The charge was unfounded. Revolts were
much more frequent before the abolition than they had
been since, as may be seen from Long's History of
Jamaica. It was merely a cry set up by the island
newspapers, and by those interested in continuing the
abuse*."

* Hansard's Debates, vol. xxxviii. p. 854.

It may be expected, that some allusion should be here made to the
Barbadoes insurrection, as it is called, of 1816. Of this alleged
insurrection it may be sufficient to say, that for some cause or
other, the whole of the circumstances attending it have been most
cautiously suppressed by Government, as well as by the Colonial
authorities. Not a single official document respecting it has been
allowed to see the light. All we know is,, that the alleged insurgents
made no attack : they were the -party attacked. No White man appears to
have been killed or even wounded by the Blacks, while from one to two thou-
sand Blacks are said to have been hunted down, and either put to death
without resistance, or summarily tried and executed. Into this bloody
transaction, Parliament has made no inquiry whatever .' Why have not
the West Indians called for such inquiry ? Until this is done ; until
the whole of this most mysterious affair is placed in the light of day,
it will be impossible for them to use it as an argument against dis-
cussion. Neither Parliament nor the country can forget the utter
contempt of Negro life which prevailed among the Whites in Bar-
badoes, as displayed both in their statute-book, and in the ferocious
acts of wanton barbarity communicated by Earl Seaforth in 1805 ;
and both will require proof, before they decide that the real cause
of this enormous waste of human life, was an insurrection produced
by public discussion in this country. Had the different details on

13

The reader will probably be satisfied, by what he has
read, that the alleged danger of insurrection from par-
liamentary discussion, though it may have proved a very
convenient topic of argument, in resisting every suc-
cessive attempt to abolish the Slave Trade, was wholly
without any foundation in fact. In the present case,
therefore, after the uniform experience of thirty-five
years, the presumption must be admitted to be very
strongly adverse to the reality of the alleged peril.
Indeed if the representations of the West- India party
are worthy of credit, the state of the negroes is

ONE OF SUCH HAPPINESS AND COMFORT as would, of

itself, render abortive every attempt to excite them to
insubordination, and would seem to preclude on their
parts all desire of change. And this has been the uni-
form language of the Colonists :—

" I have lived," said Mr. Baillie, the agent of
Grenada in 1792, " sixteen years in the West Indies ;
and I declare, in the most solemn manner, that I con-
sider the Negroes in the British West-India Islands to
be in as comfortable a state as the lower orders of man-
kind in any country of Europe. They are perfectly
contented with their situation *."

Mr. Barham affirmed, in 1796, that " the slaves

this subject been favourable to the Barbadian Colonists ; or could
they have exhibited clear proof of designed revolt and insurrection
on the part of the Slaves ; and, above all, could they have connected
such revolt with the discussions respecting the Registry Bill in En-
gland, the public would have been satiated with statements on the
subject: nothing could have availed to suppress them. But not a syl-
lable has been officially published, either in England or in Barbadoes,
which can throw light on these dark and sanguinary occurrences;
—nothing to shew the guilt of the Blacks, or the lenity and for-
bearance of the Whites. This deep and deathlike silence speaks
volumes.

* Hansard's Pari. Hist, vol xxix. p. 1079.

14

ivere better fed and clothed, and enjoyed more of the
comforts of life, than the generality of the . labouring
class throughout Europe"

Mr. Charles Ellis, in 1797, repelled the charges
brought against the West- Indian system, of an excess of
labour and deficiency of food, and bestowed the highest
praise on the consolidated Slave-law of Jamaica*.

In 1798, Sir William Young affirmed, that " the
Negroes on the islands had nothing to complain of.
They enjoyed comvlkte protection : their property
ivas better SECURED than our oivn-f"

And to omit innumerable assertions of the same kind,
Earl St. Vincents, in 1807, asserted, that "he was
enabled to state that the West- Indian islands formed
PARADISE ITSELF to the Negroes, in comparison with
their native country %."

The statements of the present day are no less strong
and sweeping. But then they are generally accompa-
nied by an observation which goes far to discredit all
the earlier panegyrics pronounced on the system of
Negro Slavery ; namely, that very great improvements
have taken place, of late years, in the treatment of the
Slaves. One would naturally have supposed, from those
previous statements, that there had been little or no room
for improvement.

In 1788, the Marquis Townsend, after having lis-
tened to some such sweeping affirmations of the supe-
rior comfort and happiness of the West- Indian Slave,

* Ibid. vol. xxxiii. p. 251. This law, however, requires only to
be read, in order to shew how little it merited such an encomium.

t Ibid. vol. xxxiv. p. 558. And yet, at a later period, when he was
Governor of Tobago, he acknowledged, that the law of evidence
was such as almost necessarily " covered the most guilty European
with impunity," whatever oppressions or cruelties he might have
committed towards slaves.

\ Hansard's Debates, vol. viii. p. 670.

15

as have been quoted above, got up and remarked, that
"if it were true, as was alleged, that the Negroes were
ticice as happy as the English labourers, Parliament
ought to sit all the summer, in order to put the English
yeoman on a footing with the West-India slave*.

But in reply to all the glowing descriptions which have,
at any time, been given of the happiness of the Negro
slave,it mightbe sufficientto adduce the decided testimony
borne, by some of the most distinguished of the West-
India Planters, to the necessity of parliament-
ary interference, in order to meliorate their con-
dition. Mr. Bryan Edwards, and others, have
painted, in the most affecting colours, the wretchedness
which results from the principle of law, universally re-
cognised in the British West Indies, that slaves are
chattels, and have dwelt on the immense benefits
they would derive from being attached to the soil. Mr.
Charles Ellis took the same view of the subject,
when, in 1797, he moved an address to the Crown, that
the different Colonial Legislatures mightbe called upon
" to adopt such measures as should appear to them best
calculated to obviate the causes which have hitherto
impeded the natural increase of the Negroes already in
the islands," and " particularly with a view to the same
effect, to employ such means as may conduce to the mo-
ral and religious improvement of the Negroes, and se-
cure to them, throughout all the British West Indies,
the certain, immediate, and active protection of the
law" And in the speech which accompanied the motion,
he dwelt on the necessity of affording to the Slaves moral
instruction and education.

Now there must have been, in the mind of Mr. Ellis
and his friends, a strong persuasion that in 1707 much,

* Hansard's Pari. Hist. 1788-9, p. 616.

16

very much remained to be done by the Colonial Legis-
latures to improve the condition of the slaves. It is for
them to shew what steps have been taken, daring the
twenty-six years which have since elapsed, to realize any
of those improvements which were so admitted, by the
whole body of the West-Indians in Parliament, (all of
whom supported the address) to be then greatly needed.
The Slaves have not yet ceased to be chattels. No
means of education have yet been provided for them. No
effective steps have yet been taken for their religious im-
provement; nay, they are to this hour denied the Sabbath
as a day of repose and religious observance. So far have
the Colonial Legislatures been from removing the impe-
diments to the natural increase of the Slaves, that that
work is still to be commenced, the marriage tie being
still unknown among them. And so far are the Slaves
frombeing ceetainly, immediately, and ACTIVE-
LY protected by LAW, that, BY LAW, at the present
moment, every slave, male or female, in the Colonies,
may be punished by their owner or overseer, without his
being required to give any reason for so doing, not only
ivith any length of confinement he may think proper,
but with thirty-nine lashes of the cart whip on the naked,
body; and may also be compelled to labour, willing or
unwilling, without wages, by the impulse of the same
cruel instrument.

The West Indians boast that their Slaves are as
happy as the peasantry of England. But, let us sup-
pose a state of things in this country, in which every
bailiff' of an estate should be armed with a power of
driving the labourers, both men and women, to their
work, by means of the lash, and should be also at
liberty to use his entire discretion as to the infliction of
punishment, by confinement to any extent, and by the
cartwhip to the extent of thirty-nine lashes on the

17

bare body; for any conduct which he might construe
into an offence. What, I ask, would, in this case, be
the condition of our English peasantry? And can we
regard the overseers of the West Indies as safer de-
positaries of such tremendous powers than English
bailiffs would be ; especially when we consider all the
circumstances of degradation arising from colour, and
other peculiarities attaching to Negro bondage? Or
are indeed the overseers of the West Indies angels, and
not men, that there is no risk of their abusing the autho-
rity thus reposed in them ? Mr. Brougham is well
known to have deeply considered the subject of Colonial
manners. Whoever reads his work on Colonial Policy,
or his Speech on the Kegistry Bill in 1816, will see how
little he thought these men qualified for the due exercise
of so momentous a trust*.

But it was not only in 1797, that the necessity of
parliamentary interference was admitted by the West
Indians. Again, in 1816, the same necessity was implied
in the motion of Lord Holland in the House of Lords,
and of Mr. Palmer in the House of Commons, pray-
ing his Majesty " to recommend, IN the strongest
MANNER, to the local authorities in the respective colo-
nies, to carry into effect every measure which may tend
to promote the moral and religious improvement, as
well as the comfort and happiness of the Negroes."
But why this strong recommendation from Parliament
(proposed too by West Indians), if it were true that
the state of the Slaves was what it ought to be'; was,
in short, as happy as that of British labourers?

To all this the West Indians may, and probably will
reply — " To such parliamentary interference as this we
do not object. What we object to is any attempt

* Hansard's Debates, vol. xxxiv. p. 1217-
B

18

ON THE PART OF PARLIAMENT TO LEGISLATE FOR

the colonists; as such an attempt would be a
violation of the sacred rights of the Colonies, whose
local legislatures alone ought to make laws for their
internal government"

Had the previous references made by Parliament to
the Colonial Legislatures been attended with beneficial
effects, such a plan might have been more deserving of
attention. But this is notoriously not the case. On the
point of right, however, what has been the opinion
of our most distinguished statesmen ?

Mr. Burke, it will be recollected, (himself the great
opposer of the taxation of the North- American Colo-
nies,) framed a plan for ameliorating the condition of
the Slaves, which was to he enacted and enforced by

THE IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT ALONE, without the

intervention or even recognition of the Colonial Legis-
latures.— Mr. Dundas, afterwards Lord Melville,
followed, in this respect the general plan of Mr.
Burke. He professed to have in view " the total an-
nihilation of hereditary Slavery." " And he should
suggest (he said) the manner in which he thought this
might be accomplished. The planter who was the
owner of the father, in his opinion, should take away
the child from the moment of his birth; take care to
have him inspired with a sense of religion ; and when
he had attained to a certain age, the boy in return
should serve him for so many years, till he had repaid
him the expense of his education. The consequence of
this must be visible. Thus nurtured in the principles
of religion, he would be filled with a just sense of duty
and gratitude. If his master was a humane man, he
would feel a consolation in what he had done. The
parents ivould also turn with gratitude to their owner,
and forget THEIR MISERIES in the prospects of the

19

happiness of their offspring. The rising generation,
thus trained and conducted in the paths of piety, would
be attached to the island, and, of course, in the hour of
danger spring forward in the defence of it. Was this
visionary 1 He trusted not. He was well convinced
that the heart of the African was susceptible of the
finest impressions of gratitude, as experience had
evinced; and that it was also susceptible of the ten-
derest emotions of love. He most earnestly solicited
all the gentlemen interested in the question to support
his modification : he would sooner see all the lands in
the West Indies cultivated by freemen than by slaves.'
'* To illustrate the topic of discussion, he referred to
an instance of the abolition of Slavery in the northern
parts of the kingdom. Alluding to the parliamentary
proceedings in 1775, he stated, that, at that period, the
coalliers, salters, and those employed under ground, were
in a state of Slavery ; and that when it was proposed
to acknowledge them AS FREE CITIZENS, a clamour
ivas excited that those concerned in the coallieries would
be ruined; that the slavery of these poor people was a
necessary evil; and that to grant them freedom would
raise the price of coals beyond the capacity of their
fellow-citizens. These assertions, however,

PROVED NUGATORY: THE PROPERTY WAS NOT

INJURED, and the idea of an advance in the price of
coals vanished in smoke *."

Mr. Windham appears to have viewed this matter
in the same light with these two statesmen. In 1798,
we find him saying, " I am inclined to trust for a while
to the Colonial Assemblies by way of experiment. Had.
I no hopes of considerable advantage by doing so, I
own I should be inclined to the plan of the late Mr*

* Clarendon's Parliamentary Chronicle, vol. iv. p. 630.

b2

20

Burke ; a man who left no part of the interests of man-
kind unexamined, and who brought with him more
wisdom in discussing every subject he attempted to in-
vestigate than any man I ever knew. His idea was to
take much of the poiver of legislation on this subject
out of the hands of the Colonists, and to make many
regulations within ourselves by which to meliorate the
condition of the Negro *."

Earl Grey, in 1807, looked forward to " the aboli-
tion of Slavery, encouraged and assisted by such regu-
lations as the wisdom of Parliament should think ft to
adopt f."

Lord Grenville, in 1817, declared, "that he never
could admit that by any address to the Crown," (alluding
to that of the preceding year mentioned above,) "a mil-
lion of British subjects should be withdrawn from the
control of the Imperial Parliament J."

In 18l8, Mr. Wilberforce observed, — " When it
is known that the recommendation of such men as Mr,
Ellis and Mr. Barham' had failed to make any impression
on the Colonial Assemblies, he could place no firm de-
pendence, except on the legislation of the mother coun-
try, and could put his trust in no other guarantee. It,
teas their duty to watch over the interests of a million
of beings at length recognised as fellow-creatures §."

On the same occasion, Sir S. Romilly remarked,
that " it had been said that this country had not the,
power of legislating for the Colonies. It was needless
for him to state, that it had been already done in nume-
rous instances. He might only mention, that it had
been done by the act by which Colonial property was
made liable as assets for debt. No man could for a

* Hausard's Pari. Hist. vol. xxxiii. p. 1413.
t Hansard's Debate?, vol. viii. p. 951.
% Ibid. vol. xxxv. p. 1205.
6 Ibid, vol xxxviii. p. 295.

£1

moment imagine that the British Constitution could ap-
ply to these colonies. That constitution should be taken
as a whole. It held, that all men stood in a state of
equality in THE eye OF the LAW. The moment an
individual set foot on British soil, he became free.
What then could be more inconsistent than to talk of
establishing that constitution in the West Indies ? For
there its principles would be reversed and destroyed •
and under the auspices of British liberty, Slavery would
be rendered worse than under arbitrary governments.
Arbitrary governments, indeed, did make laws for their
Colonies. But how is that principle of the British Con-
stitution to be applied to such Colonics as ours, that no
man could be bound by laws to which he had not con-
sented. In Dominica, for instance, it was enacted, that
a free Man of Colour, coming hither from another island,
became a slave, if he had not a certain certificate, and
did not pay a tax of 35/. This was the enactment of
those who talked of the British Constitution ! A Slave
once landed on the British coast became a freeman ; but
a free Man of Colour, the instant he touched the soil oi
Dominica, became a slave ! — In short, the whole of
these laws were founded on a principle diametrically op-
posite to that which formed the basis of the British Con-
stitution. And, with respect to those laws which lookea
so well on paper, which appeared so well calculated to
benefit the Slave Population, they not only were not
executed, but were never intended to be carried into ef-
fect. But though these unfortunate beings were the
slaves of their masters, they were also the subjects
of the king. they owed him allegiance, and
he was bound to afford them protection.
They were as much subjects as englishmen

WERE*."

* Hansard's Debates, voJ. xxxviii. pp. S02— 304.

22

Mr. J. H. Smith then stated, that " when he consi-
dered that in none of the Colonies any steps had been taken
to encourage the manumission of slaves ; when be consi-
dered the treatment to which, in all the Colonies, they
were still subject ; that the cartwhip was still resorted to as
an instrument of discipline ; that the slaves were still dis-
credited as witnesses ; and that their evidence could not
be taken in a Court of Justice ; — he could not help think-
ing it the duty of Parliament to protect those who might
thus be exposed to oppression.

Mr.WARRE contended that it was absurd to suppose
that any real good could be effected for ameliorating the
condition of the slaves, unless discussions were raised
in that House. It was by such discussions that every
thing hitherto done had been effected *.

But by far the most decisive statement made on this
subject came from Mr. Canning. A speech of his, in
1799, is given at great length in Hansard's Parlia-
mentary History of that year, from which I shall take
the liberty of making some extracts :—

Alluding to the Address moved by Mr. C. Ellis, in
1797, Mr. Canning said, The point to be ascertained
was, ■" whether or not the Colonial Assemblies ivere, in
FACT, talcing such steps as evinced a sincere desire to
fulfil the expressed purpose of that motion." — He then
proceeded to animadvert on a petition of the Assembly
of Jamaica, in which they asserted the right of ob-
taining labourers from Africa. "Never," observed
Mr.CAMNiNG, "even in the practical application of that
detested and pernicious doctrine of the rights of man,
had the word right been so shamefully affixed to mur-
der, to devastation, to the invasion of public indepen-
dence, to the pollution and destruction of private hap-

* Hansard's Debates, pp.308— 852.

23

piness,to gross and unpalliated injustice, to the spreading
of misery and mourning over the earth, to the massacre
of innocent individuals, and to the extermination of un-
offending nations, as when the right to trade in
man's blood* ivas asserted by the enlightened govern-
ment of a civilized country."

In a preceding part of the debate, Sir W.Young had

expressed much displeasure with Mr. Wilberforce, for

having said that the laws of our islands did not even equal

those of the French Code Noire. Mr. Canning made

the following observations in reply: "The Hon. Bart, felt

the utmost indignation that the laws by which the colonies

of a free country were regulated should be compared

with any body of legislation emanating from an absolute

monarchy. He might refer to the papers upon the table,

to prove that, be the Code Noire of France as bad as

the Hon. Bart, was desirous it should be thought, the

laws in the English islands had been found at least as

susceptible of amendment. He might refer the Hon.

Bart, to the maimings and mutilations, the scourges

and spiked collars, the use of which was prohibited or

regulated by the papers on the table. But, wishing to

avoid invidious topics, he would only ask, in point of

fact, whether he had never found, in the whole extent

of his various reading, in ancient and modern history,

that the Colonies of a free country were in general

worse regulated and worse administered than those of

more absolute governments ? That this was a truth

all history shewed." " But," says the Hon. Bart., " it

cannot be that a code framed by a despotic government

should be superior or equal to the laws enacted by the

government of a free country. Was he then prepared

to argue that there was something in the nature of the

relation between the despot and his slave, which must

* The very question now at issue.

24
vitiate, and render nugatory and null whatever laws
the former might make for the benefit of the latter?"
" Was this his argument 1 He thanked him for it. He
admitted its truth to any extent the Hon. Bart, pleased.
And let the House, and the Hon. Bart, mark how it
bore on the question before them. The question is,
whether, in what is to be done towards alleviating and
finally extinguishing the horrors of the Slave Trade, the
proper agent was the British House of Commons, or
the Colonial Assemblies. The Hon. Bart, contended
that the Colonial Assemblies, and not the British House
of Commons were the agents most proper to be em-
ployed. But what was his argument ? ' Trust not the
masters of slaves in what concerns legislation for Slavery.
However specious their laws may appear, depend upon
it they must be ineffectual in their application. It is in
the nature of things that they should he so!' Granted.
Let then the British house op commons do
their part themselves. Let them not delegate
the trust of doing it to those ivho, according to the
Hon. Bart., cannot execute that trust fairly* Let the
. evil he remedied hy an assembly of freemen, hy the
government of a free people, and not hy those whom he
represents as utterly unqualified for the undertaking,
nor by the masters of slaves. Their laivs, the Hon.
Bart, avowed, could never reach, would never cure the
evil." " There ivas something in the nature of absolute
authority, in the relation between master and slave
which made despotism, in all cases, and under all cir-
cumstances, an incompetent andunsure executor even of
its own provisions in favour of the objects of its povjer."
Again — " A man's strongest permanent interests were
liable to be overborne by his passions. Look at the laws
on the table, and see what sort of evils they are intended
to remedy. Besides, the interest of a proprietor rest-

25

dent on the island, unencumbered with debt, and look-
ing to his estate as a permanent provision for his family,
is one thing ; — that of the absentee proprietor, who wishes
to lay the foundation of a fortune elsewhere — that of the
embarrassed proprietor, who wishes to discharge his en-
cumbrances— and that of the overseer, anxious to realize
a sum of money to purchase an estate, are interests of a
very different kind indeed from that steady and perma-
nent interest, which, contenting itself with moderate
returns, would ensure mild and considerate treatment to
the labourers, whose work was to produce them. All
these might require increased labour and rapid produce :
all these might, in the nature of things, be less solicitous
about the eventual exhaustion of the soil, or of the
workers of the soil, than about the extent of present
profit. And when the proportion of these classes to
that of the resident and unembarrassed proprietors was
considered, what became' of the general statement that
the interest of the owner must, in all cases, secure the
good treatment of the slaves ? He hoped the slaves
were well treated, but that they must be so from any ne-
cessitating and unalterable cause he could not agree*."
Again, on the 19th June, 1816, Mr. Canning ob-
served, that " it was far from him to doubt the omnipo-
tence of Parliament ; but he thought that the question
should not be stirred unless interference became abso-
lutely necessary. When that necessity arose, his voice
should be fearlessly raised in its favour." " He had
known, in some cases, instances of obstinacy in the Colo-
nial Assemblies, which left that House no choice but of
direct interference. Such conduct might now call for
such an exertion on the part of Parliament ; but all
he pleaded for was, that time should be granted. The

* Hansard's Pari. Hht. vol. xxxlv. \k 5iiS— 559.

26

address (Mr. Palmer's) could not be misunderstood. It
said to the assemblies, You are safe for the present from
the interference of Parliament, on the belief that you
will do yourselves what is required of you. The Assem-
blies might be left to infer the consequences of refusal,
and PARLIAMENT MIGHT REST SATISFIED WITH
THE CONSCIOUSNESS THAT THEY HELD IN THEIR
HANDS THE MEANS OF ACCOMPLISHING THAT
WHICH THEY HAD PROPOSED*."

Enough has probably been said on this subject. Let
us now advert to another. It is alleged, that the Aboli-
tionists have acted in bad faith towards the Colonists ;
that throughout the Slave-Trade controversy, they pro-
fessed to have no view to any object but that of the
abolition of the Trade, and disclaimed any ulterior design
of aiming at the emancipation of the slaves;
but that now, the emancipation of the Slaves was their
declared and settled purpose.

To judge correctly of the fairness of this imputation,
it will be necessary to take a review of what was all along
avowed upon the point in question by those who took
a prominent part in advocating the cause of abolition.

The language both of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox was
very unequivocal. In April 179.1, we find the latter
laying down the following general principle on the sub-
ject, from which he never deviated.

" Personal freedom must be the first object of every
human being ; and it was a right of which he who de-
prives a fellow -creature is absolutely criminal in so de-
priving him, and which he who withholds when it is
in his power to restore, is no lesss criminal in with-
holding f."

No less decisive was the language of Mr. Pitt, in

* Hansard's Debates, vol. xxxiv. p. 1220.

f Hansard's Parliamentary History, vol. xxix. p. 334.

27
April 1792, " It is within the power of the Colonies,"
he remarked, " and is it not their indispensable duty, to
apply themselves to the correction of the various abuses
by which population is restrained. The most important
consequences may be expected to attend Colonial regu-
lations for this purpose. With the improvement of in-
ternal population, the condition of every Negro will im-
prove also : his liberty will advance, or at least he
will be approaching to a state of liberty. Nor CAN
YOU INCREASE THE HAPPINESS OR EXTEND THE
FREEDOM OF THE NEGRO, WITHOUT ADDING IN AN
EQUAL DEGREE TO THE SAFETY OF THE ISLANDS
AND OF ALL THEIR INHABITANTS. TIlUS, Sir, in the

place of slaves, who naturally have an interest directly
opposite to that of their master, and are therefore
viewed by them with an eye of constant suspicion, you
will create a body of valuable citizens and subjects
forming a part of the same community, having a com-
mon interest with their superiors in the security and
prosperity of the whole. Gentlemen, talk of the dimi-
nution of labour. But if you restore to this degraded
race the true feelings of men ; if you take them out
from among the order of Iwutes, and place them on a
level. with the rest of the human species, they will then
work with that energy which is natural to men, and
their labour will be productive in a thousand ways
above what it has yet been, as the labour of a man must
be more productive than that of a brute *.."

Mr. Pitt then proceeded to illustrate his argument by
referring to the answers which had been given by the
Grenada Assembly to certain queries put to them by
the Privy Council ; and in which it was affirmed, that
the Negroes did twice as much work when employed

* Hansard's Parliamentary History, vol. xxix. p. 1138.

28

for their own benefit, as they did when labouring for
their masters. The whole of the passage, indeed the
whole of that splendid speech, is most highly deserving
of attention,

Again, in 1804, Mr. Pitt affirmed, that" it was for the
interest of the planters, and for the benefit of all the
islands, {and those who look at the subject with refer-
ence to the principles of general philosophy would admit,
that the system of restraint was as unprofiable as it
was odious J; that the labour of a man who was con-
scious of freedom, was of much more value than of him
who felt that he ivas a slave *."

Lord Grenville's views were perfectly coincident
with those of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox. " Personal free-
dom" observed his Lordship, in 1806, " was a blessing
granted by God; and could not with justice be violated"
" In the course of Mr. Pitt's discussions of the subject,
his calculations on the comparative value of the labour
of freemen and slaves, were luminous and convincing-.
One of the incontrovertible results was, that the labour
of slaves ivas not so profitable by much as that of free-
men f."

Again : " It is of great^consequence that we should
look attentively to that period, when the disgrace
of slavery, in any form, shall no longer be suffered
within the territories of this free country. While we
are advocates for the liberties of Europe, while we
raise the standard of freedom against the common enemy
of order, virtue, and humanity, it behoves us peculiarly
to preserve that freedom unpolluted* tvithin the pale of
the British empire. I recommend this measure as the
most safe and effectual means of the ultimate emancipa-

* Hansard's Debates, vol. ii. p. 550.

t Hansard's Debates, vol. vii. pp. 803, 804.

Hon of the Slaves in the West Indies. By tbis expe-
dient you will abundantly ameliorate their condition, so
that they may be Jit ted for the enjoyment of that liberty
which in every region of the earth is THE common

RIGHT OF HUMAN NATURE*."

Nor was Earl Grey less decisive on this point. In
1807, he thus expressed himself:

"We have been told, that if this be considered as a
measure of justice, we do not follow up our own prin-
ciples ; for if slavery be in itself unjust, we ought to
abolish it altogether. I think it sufficient to say that
the result of this measure will, I trust, lead to the
abolition of slavery, encouraged AND assisted By
SUCH REGULATIONS AS THE WISDOM OF PARLIA-
MENT MAY AFTERWARDS THINK FIT TO ADOPT. I

trust, that by this measure, slavery will gradually wear
out without the immediate intervention of any positive
law ; in like manner as took place in the states of Greece
and Rome, and some parts of modern Europe, where
slaves have been permitted to work out and purchase
their own freedom, and that such regulations may be
adopted as have been adopted in some of the Spanish
and Portuguese colonies. In some of the states of Ame-
rica,measures of gradual emancipation have been adopt-
ed; and 1 would ash whether any instance can be pointed
out, of insurrections and revolutions in consequence of
such measures, or whether tluy have not, in such states
been peaceable and orderly * I"

It seems wholly unnecessary to quote the frequent
declarations of Mr. Wilberfokce to the same effect.
He often declared his strong desire " to convert the
Slaves into a free and happy peasantry, capable of de-

* Debates on Slave Trade, for 1S07, pp. 2T, 28.
t Hansard's Debates, vol. viii. pp. 954, 955. •

30

fending the islands which they inhabited, instead of en-
dangering- them by their presence*." It may be of
still more weight in the argument, to refer to the memo-
rable declaration of Mr. Ward, now Lord Dudley
and Ward, himself a large proprietor of slaves, whose
numbers have continued regularly and rapidly to in-
crease under his benign and paternal management.
" It was a fact," he observed, " which needed no
evidence to support it, that the human race was pre-
vented by nothing but ILL TREATMENT, /row multi-
plying as fast in the West Indies as in every other
country where the bounty of nature was not cramped
by mischievous institutions." " The reasons which
applied to the termination of the Slave Trade," he was
of opinion, " applied as well to the total aboli-
tion of slavery " as to that of the Slave Trade ;
" and if I did not believe" added he, " that this
measure would ultimately tend to the emancipation of
the Negroes, I should be inclined to oppose it as an
improper compromise between the British Parliament
and the West-India planters f ."

But even if the Abolitionists had heretofore been
silent on this subject, the principles on which the aboli-
tion of slavery is now called for would not have been
affected by such a circumtance. For it cannot be
denied, that the very same principles which led to the
condemnation of the Slave Trade by the British Legis-
lature, as immoral, inhuman, and unjust, must lead to
the very same sentence on the Slavery which has been
produced by it, whenever that system comes under the
serious review of Parliament. Nor is this any new
opinion. It is an opinion which was clearly and une-

• See Hansard's Debates, vol. xxxv. p. 775.
t Debates on the Slave Trade for 1807, p. 167.

31

quivocally expressed in 1807, by two of his Majesty's
present Cabinet Ministers, who were then hostile to the
measure of abolition.

The Earl of Westmoreland observed, that " if
the Slave Trade was contrary to justice and humanity,
it was also contrary to justice and humanity to keep the
Negroes who had been procured by means of the trade
in a state of perpetual slavery *."

And it was the Earl of Liverpool's opinion, that
" The same principle on which the noble Lord condemned
the Slave Trade applied with equal force to the state of
slavery itself f,"'

The language of Mr. Windham, in 1806, was still
more full and decisive. " That the Slave Trade," he
said, " is contrary to justice, humanity, and sound
policy, nobody can doubt ; and I would add, slavery
too ; for that is the first character of slavery. Slavery
is that which every one must wish to see abolished.
And certainly I had rather see it abolished by law,
than wait for the process of civilization. What gen-
tlemen say of the Slave Trade, I say of slavery, that it
is a great evil; they are each malum in se. Although
slavery has so long subsisted, I have no hesitation in
saying, it is a state not fit to subsist, because it gives to
one human being a greater power over another than it
is fit for any human being to possess. Man is not fit to
have so much power over his fellow-creatures J."

It is not, of course, the intention of this pamphlet to
enter into the general question of Negro Slavery. On
that subject T must refer to the various publications

* Hansard's Debates, vol. viii. p. 702.

t Ibid, vol.vii. p. 805.

% Debates on the Slave Trade, for 1806, pp. 70, 71.

32

which have recently appeared*, and which prove that
the state of slavery existing in the British Colonies, no
less than the Slave Trade from which it sprung, is con-
trary to justice, humanity, and sound policy ; incon-
sistent with the principles of the British Constitution;
and repugnant to the spirit of the Christian religion ;
and that it ought to he abolished at the earliest period,
ivhich is compatible with a due attention to the various
interests involved in the measure.

If the reader concurs in this proposition, he will pro-
bably find in the preceding pages enough to satisfy him,
that the British Parliament alone is competent to carry
that proposition into effect, and that it may do so with-
out any apprehension of those dangers which, it has been
so confidently affirmed, must follow from parliamentary
interference.

* See particularly Mr. Wilberforce's "Appeal,** and a pamphlet
entitled " Negro Slavery."

FINIS.

Printed by Ellertou and Henderson,
Gough Square, London.